• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[传统牙线与替代材料的比较分析]

[Comparative analysis of conventional dental floss and alternative materials].

作者信息

Campos Júnior A, Passanezi E, Serizawa T C, Barros A S, Navarro M F, Lopes E S

机构信息

Departamento de Prótese da Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru-Universidade de São Paulo.

出版信息

Rev Odontol Univ Sao Paulo. 1990 Jan-Mar;4(1):59-61.

PMID:2135334
Abstract

The interproximal plaque-removing effect of three different materials (classic dental floss, rafia floss and indian floss) was tested in a group of 80 males (18 years-old). After two weeks all the materials had the same efficacy in removing the bacterial plaque, with significant reduction in interproximal plaque index. According to an opinion inquiry the rafia floss was the most comfortable material to use and has the lowest cost as well.

摘要

在一组80名18岁男性中测试了三种不同材料(传统牙线、拉菲草牙线和印度牙线)的邻面菌斑清除效果。两周后,所有材料在清除细菌菌斑方面具有相同的功效,邻面菌斑指数显著降低。根据一项意见调查,拉菲草牙线是使用起来最舒适的材料,而且成本也最低。

相似文献

1
[Comparative analysis of conventional dental floss and alternative materials].[传统牙线与替代材料的比较分析]
Rev Odontol Univ Sao Paulo. 1990 Jan-Mar;4(1):59-61.
2
An investigation of the efficacy and safety of a new electric interdental plaque remover for the reduction of interproximal plaque and gingivitis.一种新型电动牙间隙菌斑清除器减少牙间隙菌斑和牙龈炎的疗效及安全性研究。
J Clin Dent. 1996;7(3 Spec No):74-7.
3
Evaluation of floss types for interproximal plaque removal.用于邻面菌斑清除的牙线类型评估。
Am J Dent. 2000 Aug;13(4):212-4.
4
Comparative effectiveness of an essential oil mouthrinse and dental floss in controlling interproximal gingivitis and plaque.精油漱口水与牙线在控制邻面牙龈炎和牙菌斑方面的比较效果
Am J Dent. 2002 Dec;15(6):351-5.
5
Evaluation of a floss-holding device compared to hand-held floss for interproximal plaque, gingivitis, and patient acceptance.与手持牙线相比,对一种牙线握持装置进行评估,观察其对邻面菌斑、牙龈炎及患者接受度的影响。
Clin Prev Dent. 1988 Jul-Aug;10(4):6-14.
6
Evaluation of the plaque removal efficacy of two commercially available dental floss devices.两种市售牙线装置的牙菌斑清除效果评估。
J Clin Dent. 2007;18(1):1-6.
7
Clinical evaluation of a new flossing device.一种新型牙线清洁器的临床评估
Quintessence Int. 1995 Apr;26(4):273-8.
8
Plaque-removing effect of dental floss and toothpicks in children 12-13 years of age.牙线和牙签对12至13岁儿童的去菌斑效果。
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1976 Jul;4(4):137-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1976.tb00970.x.
9
Efficacy of dental floss impregnated with chlorhexidine on reduction of supragingival biofilm: a randomized controlled trial.含氯己定牙线对减少龈上生物膜的疗效:一项随机对照试验。
Int J Dent Hyg. 2015 May;13(2):117-24. doi: 10.1111/idh.12112. Epub 2014 Nov 5.
10
Comparison of the use of a toothpick holder to dental floss in improvement of gingival health in humans.牙签架与牙线在改善人类牙龈健康方面的应用比较。
J Periodontol. 2004 Apr;75(4):551-6. doi: 10.1902/jop.2004.75.4.551.